The country would be out of debt if we could collect a dollar for everytime Obama has lied. Maybe he can save money by not spending so much on vacations and open the White to tours. But that white trash likes to live large and then we could collect a dollar for evertime old bushy lied and the country may be up a few trillion rather than down. Barack OBush have taken this country down the $#!TTer

If Bush hadn't lied (or bought the neocon's lies) about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the American taxpayer could have been saved about a trillion dollars in costs for a unnecessary war and the subsequent reconstruction of a country most Americans will never visit.

The country would be out of debt if we could collect a dollar for everytime Obama has lied. Maybe he can save money by not spending so much on vacations and open the White to tours. But that white trash likes to live large and then we could collect a dollar for evertime old bushy lied and the country may be up a few trillion rather than down. Barack OBush have taken this country down the $#!TTer

If Bush hadn't lied (or bought the neocon's lies) about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the American taxpayer could have been saved about a trillion dollars in costs for a unnecessary war and the subsequent reconstruction of a country most Americans will never visit.

where did you get the trillion number? REFERENCES please!!!!!

There's no exact number. At least $800 billion was spent directly on the war. When war related costs are added in (such as interest on the money borrowed to pay for the war, veterans benefits, etc), estimates of total cost to the taxpayer tend to increase to $3 or $4 trillion. Here's one of many articles:

The country would be out of debt if we could collect a dollar for everytime Obama has lied. Maybe he can save money by not spending so much on vacations and open the White to tours. But that white trash likes to live large

and then we could collect a dollar for evertime old bushy lied and the country may be up a few trillion rather than down. Barack OBush have taken this country down the $#!TTer

The one thing that the current administration has done that I appreciate is that their messaging has been consistent for years, just like the above. Although recently we've seen much less of the "past eight years mess" messaging its never truly gone regardless of its lack of effect.

Obama is in his second term. its time to give up the bush bashing (and this is not even to suggest that Bush didn't deserve some of it). At some point, a president has to stand on his own merits and demerits, and that time has come for this president. Bringing up Bush on a regular basis is akin to doing the same with LBJ or Ford. Does it really matter anymore? No.

The country would be out of debt if we could collect a dollar for everytime Obama has lied. Maybe he can save money by not spending so much on vacations and open the White to tours. But that white trash likes to live large and then we could collect a dollar for evertime old bushy lied and the country may be up a few trillion rather than down. Barack OBush have taken this country down the $#!TTer

If Bush hadn't lied (or bought the neocon's lies) about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the American taxpayer could have been saved about a trillion dollars in costs for a unnecessary war and the subsequent reconstruction of a country most Americans will never visit.

The country would be out of debt if we could collect a dollar for everytime Obama has lied. Maybe he can save money by not spending so much on vacations and open the White to tours. But that white trash likes to live large and then we could collect a dollar for evertime old bushy lied and the country may be up a few trillion rather than down. Barack OBush have taken this country down the $#!TTer

If Bush hadn't lied (or bought the neocon's lies) about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the American taxpayer could have been saved about a trillion dollars in costs for a unnecessary war and the subsequent reconstruction of a country most Americans will never visit.

Assuming you're correct, what praytell has the current administration done to fix the problem? Again, we're still blaming decisions made during an administration that hasn't ruled in over 5 years. So if you're hired to replace a guy that racked up 1T in debt, but instead of working the issue, blame him/her continuously for 5 years, then call for more spending on top of what the last person spent - you're doing your job! What cracks me up about the so-called Democrats today is that they've been whining (whether justified or not) about the "last guy" but have only worsened the problem. Consider, pre-Obamacare, the "problem" was that about 30M folks didn't have health care. That's less than 10% of the people. So, to fix this problem, the administration basically passed a law (again, intentions don't count) to completely re-overhaul health care, and in so doing, raised taxes (you can call them what you want - they're taxes as defined by the Supreme Court) significantly on everyone (except of course the poor - they don't pay taxes). Except of course, this law doesn't apply to our elected leaders on the federal level or unions. Then, if you do the research, you're toes will curl - Pelosi and other "pets of the press" get huge amount of waivers of this tax/supposed health care for their own constituents. Yup, great job. BTW - let me ask you - if Bush's administration would have pulled the same thing this one did over Bengazi (spelling error I know) - the press and the liberals would have went absolutely nuts. And I just love how some liberals charge that conservatives parrot Fox's talking points. Again, Obama can and has told bold-faced lies (and that just during this sequester) - and the press and his fellow liberals swear to those lies. Hello pot, meet kettle.

The country would be out of debt if we could collect a dollar for everytime Obama has lied. Maybe he can save money by not spending so much on vacations and open the White to tours. But that white trash likes to live large and then we could collect a dollar for evertime old bushy lied and the country may be up a few trillion rather than down. Barack OBush have taken this country down the $#!TTer

If Bush hadn't lied (or bought the neocon's lies) about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the American taxpayer could have been saved about a trillion dollars in costs for a unnecessary war and the subsequent reconstruction of a country most Americans will never visit.

Game, set, and match.

Not exactly, the NATIONAL SECURITY advisor was a Clinton hold over who said IRAQ having chemical weapons was "a slam dunk" and all the LIBS , Kerry, "who cares" Clinton, etc AGREED!!!

unemployment would never get to 8% if we passed 870 billion in spending.

he wanted gasoline to get to $7-8/gal

heaped destain on " those people that cling to their guns and religion"

made 3 illegal appointments to the NLB

refuses to approve the Nebraska pipeline

denies children access to the White House while living large with Tiger Woods.

He also:

- Directed department directors/managers to inflict the most pain in their decisions to manage the sequester to best support his lies about the "catastrophy" it would bring would bring. It cost about 18K per week to keep the White House open for tours - but typical of his bratty mind-set, that's what the white house decided needed to be cut.

- The "cuts" aren't "cuts," their actually decreases in increased spending. For example: you've budgeted your personal finances to spend 10K this year. Last year you spent 8K. So in the first quarter of this year, you back up and decide to spend only 9K. And you'd call this a cut? Good gried - American's are so willing to accept a lie as long as a liberal speaks it and the lackey press continues to report it as truth.

- Gun legislation - didn't hear much about it until Newtown. Now, it's a priority. Like one of his advisers said "let's not waste a good disaster." Yeah, that's a noble sentiment.

- Meanwhile, back on the farm, the country's had a spending problem yet all his proposals have called for increased spending. Yup, liberal economics at it's finest. And by the way, the problem is so big now even a fiscal conservative like me has to acknowledge that "the rich" by paying more taxes will have to pay more. You'd think if the problem was (and it is) so drastic as to increase taxes on anyone - you'd at least make spending cuts - but nope, like the state of CT - keep increasing spending - tax at every opportunity (all classes), increase spending by double-digit percentages, then wonder aloud how you could be 1B in debt (and yes folks, CT - run by liberals - must, by state constitution - have a balanced budget. Laughable.

- Some liberals just can't wrap their brains around the concept of "sustainability." By every report, from every source, if Medicare and Social Security aren't significantly overhauled, neither can be sustained beyond the 2022-2025 time frame. But the left's threats that we're going to kill grandpa if we try to fix it keep a'comin'. I'm 51 and have planned for nearly 25 years to NOT have social security available to me. Sometimes I think I'm alone - even though it was never designed to be a "retirement." It was designed to provide a stipend to use with planned savings to better facilitate a better quality of life for our seniors. Yet - far too many of our "seniors" didn't plan well, didn't save any money, and are so dependent on SS that decreasing benefits 1% would rock their worlds. Yup - great job folks. But hey, since they vote, you've got to appease and most could give two poopies about the sustainability of SS for their grandchildren.

- More liberal economics: we need to improve education, so let's keep spending regardless of how well those increased dollars are actually fixing the problem. "Class sizes too big, hire more teachers." Sounds great in theory, yet the NEA doesn't actually hire significantly more teachers - they hire significantly more administrators (most don't even spend an appreciable amount of time actually teaching). So, a more apt description of the concept would be - "hey, let's keep giving the NEA more money so they can ensure they line their pockets without fixing the problem - of course, they'll keep donating to our campaign war chests - so all is good."

Vent complete - standing by to be told how I'm a dirty, rotten, racist Republican because I don't support the liberal fiction/farce of how to turn this country around.

I would never vote for Ron Paul. He is a bigot, I am surprised you don't like. Entitlement is a type of type of spending opposite discretionary spending. Fascism was used ironically because you made it seem the not spending and lower taxes are a sign of the right, while two countries typically more to the left of the US a doing a better job with those two. Yes Israel should have aid cut, however that doesn't mean they don't have the right to exist. Back to the point would you cut any spending?

i honestly can't understand the majority of what you just tried to say. but to answer your question.. yes, i would cut spending. there is plenty of excessive and wasteful spending, but non of that involves the programs that have been cut.

His is why no one can debate you. You have act like you are 13. Grow up read a book and don't act like every with a different opinion is an idiot. Also learn was is actually being cut in th sequester instead of the Democratic fear mongering.

BoSox, i'm not a Democrat and no info that i have posted has been taken from a Democratic source. re-read your posts here, you haven't actually said anything of substance. so, again, i have no clue what you are talking about.

There you go again. You go straight to attacking people. You have lost. You can't defend you position that America is evil because of the cuts in the sequester. You posted your article about Israel maybe 5 times. How do you reconcile that with the aid Egypt, who is in almost total revote, got the the day after the sequester. You have no clue about what is in the sequester just that man you hate those Republicans lets blame them. You find the worst talking points and run with it. You criticize people that don't want higher taxes, yet ignore the tax deal that avoided the fiscal cliff disproportionately effected the middle class. You have implied that even spending at the Clinton era levels would be too low. Do you feel the Vice President needs a plane or are you upset that some kids can't tour the White House? Did you learn anything from the PIGS?

unemployment would never get to 8% if we passed 870 billion in spending.

he wanted gasoline to get to $7-8/gal

heaped destain on " those people that cling to their guns and religion"

made 3 illegal appointments to the NLB

refuses to approve the Nebraska pipeline

denies children access to the White House while living large with Tiger Woods.

He also:

- Directed department directors/managers to inflict the most pain in their decisions to manage the sequester to best support his lies about the "catastrophy" it would bring would bring. It cost about 18K per week to keep the White House open for tours - but typical of his bratty mind-set, that's what the white house decided needed to be cut.

- The "cuts" aren't "cuts," their actually decreases in increased spending. For example: you've budgeted your personal finances to spend 10K this year. Last year you spent 8K. So in the first quarter of this year, you back up and decide to spend only 9K. And you'd call this a cut? Good gried - American's are so willing to accept a lie as long as a liberal speaks it and the lackey press continues to report it as truth.

- Gun legislation - didn't hear much about it until Newtown. Now, it's a priority. Like one of his advisers said "let's not waste a good disaster." Yeah, that's a noble sentiment.

- Meanwhile, back on the farm, the country's had a spending problem yet all his proposals have called for increased spending. Yup, liberal economics at it's finest. And by the way, the problem is so big now even a fiscal conservative like me has to acknowledge that "the rich" by paying more taxes will have to pay more. You'd think if the problem was (and it is) so drastic as to increase taxes on anyone - you'd at least make spending cuts - but nope, like the state of CT - keep increasing spending - tax at every opportunity (all classes), increase spending by double-digit percentages, then wonder aloud how you could be 1B in debt (and yes folks, CT - run by liberals - must, by state constitution - have a balanced budget. Laughable.

- Some liberals just can't wrap their brains around the concept of "sustainability." By every report, from every source, if Medicare and Social Security aren't significantly overhauled, neither can be sustained beyond the 2022-2025 time frame. But the left's threats that we're going to kill grandpa if we try to fix it keep a'comin'. I'm 51 and have planned for nearly 25 years to NOT have social security available to me. Sometimes I think I'm alone - even though it was never designed to be a "retirement." It was designed to provide a stipend to use with planned savings to better facilitate a better quality of life for our seniors. Yet - far too many of our "seniors" didn't plan well, didn't save any money, and are so dependent on SS that decreasing benefits 1% would rock their worlds. Yup - great job folks. But hey, since they vote, you've got to appease and most could give two poopies about the sustainability of SS for their grandchildren.

- More liberal economics: we need to improve education, so let's keep spending regardless of how well those increased dollars are actually fixing the problem. "Class sizes too big, hire more teachers." Sounds great in theory, yet the NEA doesn't actually hire significantly more teachers - they hire significantly more administrators (most don't even spend an appreciable amount of time actually teaching). So, a more apt description of the concept would be - "hey, let's keep giving the NEA more money so they can ensure they line their pockets without fixing the problem - of course, they'll keep donating to our campaign war chests - so all is good."

Vent complete - standing by to be told how I'm a dirty, rotten, racist Republican because I don't support the liberal fiction/farce of how to turn this country around.

unemployment would never get to 8% if we passed 870 billion in spending.

he wanted gasoline to get to $7-8/gal

heaped destain on " those people that cling to their guns and religion"

made 3 illegal appointments to the NLB

refuses to approve the Nebraska pipeline

denies children access to the White House while living large with Tiger Woods.

He also:

- Directed department directors/managers to inflict the most pain in their decisions to manage the sequester to best support his lies about the "catastrophy" it would bring would bring. It cost about 18K per week to keep the White House open for tours - but typical of his bratty mind-set, that's what the white house decided needed to be cut.

- The "cuts" aren't "cuts," their actually decreases in increased spending. For example: you've budgeted your personal finances to spend 10K this year. Last year you spent 8K. So in the first quarter of this year, you back up and decide to spend only 9K. And you'd call this a cut? Good gried - American's are so willing to accept a lie as long as a liberal speaks it and the lackey press continues to report it as truth.

- Gun legislation - didn't hear much about it until Newtown. Now, it's a priority. Like one of his advisers said "let's not waste a good disaster." Yeah, that's a noble sentiment.

- Meanwhile, back on the farm, the country's had a spending problem yet all his proposals have called for increased spending. Yup, liberal economics at it's finest. And by the way, the problem is so big now even a fiscal conservative like me has to acknowledge that "the rich" by paying more taxes will have to pay more. You'd think if the problem was (and it is) so drastic as to increase taxes on anyone - you'd at least make spending cuts - but nope, like the state of CT - keep increasing spending - tax at every opportunity (all classes), increase spending by double-digit percentages, then wonder aloud how you could be 1B in debt (and yes folks, CT - run by liberals - must, by state constitution - have a balanced budget. Laughable.

- Some liberals just can't wrap their brains around the concept of "sustainability." By every report, from every source, if Medicare and Social Security aren't significantly overhauled, neither can be sustained beyond the 2022-2025 time frame. But the left's threats that we're going to kill grandpa if we try to fix it keep a'comin'. I'm 51 and have planned for nearly 25 years to NOT have social security available to me. Sometimes I think I'm alone - even though it was never designed to be a "retirement." It was designed to provide a stipend to use with planned savings to better facilitate a better quality of life for our seniors. Yet - far too many of our "seniors" didn't plan well, didn't save any money, and are so dependent on SS that decreasing benefits 1% would rock their worlds. Yup - great job folks. But hey, since they vote, you've got to appease and most could give two poopies about the sustainability of SS for their grandchildren.

- More liberal economics: we need to improve education, so let's keep spending regardless of how well those increased dollars are actually fixing the problem. "Class sizes too big, hire more teachers." Sounds great in theory, yet the NEA doesn't actually hire significantly more teachers - they hire significantly more administrators (most don't even spend an appreciable amount of time actually teaching). So, a more apt description of the concept would be - "hey, let's keep giving the NEA more money so they can ensure they line their pockets without fixing the problem - of course, they'll keep donating to our campaign war chests - so all is good."

Vent complete - standing by to be told how I'm a dirty, rotten, racist Republican because I don't support the liberal fiction/farce of how to turn this country around.

Great post. I wish more agreed with you and could undertand we need "real change" starting with the ablity make cuts, real cuts not just reductions in future spending.

The country would be out of debt if we could collect a dollar for everytime Obama has lied. Maybe he can save money by not spending so much on vacations and open the White to tours. But that white trash likes to live large and then we could collect a dollar for evertime old bushy lied and the country may be up a few trillion rather than down. Barack OBush have taken this country down the $#!TTer

If Bush hadn't lied (or bought the neocon's lies) about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the American taxpayer could have been saved about a trillion dollars in costs for a unnecessary war and the subsequent reconstruction of a country most Americans will never visit.

Game, set, and match.

Not exactly, the NATIONAL SECURITY advisor was a Clinton hold over who said IRAQ having chemical weapons was "a slam dunk" and all the LIBS , Kerry, "who cares" Clinton, etc AGREED!!!

It really isn't about who, or what party said or did what. It's simply that Bush didn't have ample evidence that would indicate to him that WMDs existed in Iraq, and yet he still chose to tell the public that such weapons did exist, and start a trillion dollar war because of it.

unemployment would never get to 8% if we passed 870 billion in spending.

he wanted gasoline to get to $7-8/gal

heaped destain on " those people that cling to their guns and religion"

made 3 illegal appointments to the NLB

refuses to approve the Nebraska pipeline

denies children access to the White House while living large with Tiger Woods.

Well, you see, it's sort of difficult to take anything you say seriously when you preface your poorly written list with "white trash OBAMA".

May I ask you some questions? "It's sort of diffucult to take anything you say seriously..." because you didn't like the way/method in which he said it? If someone listed a true list of what the Republicans do/did wrong but prefaced it with "stupid Republicans," or words to that effect, would you totally dismiss it? I agree the "white trash Obama" remark wasn't called for - but other than that, did the poster not post thruthful items?

That's part of the problem - people are so beholden to political correctness, that anyone who doesn't possess it goes unheard - whether or not they're telling the truth. I recall a time when truth was the main point - delivery was secondary. Now, the delivery is priority number one regardless of the truth. And Obama and his administration have always played "word nice?" Nope, they don't have to, because the press and far too many citizens give him a free pass in that regard.

I can't tell you how many times during political discussions someone has pointed out that Obama is doing something wrong, the the left side of the conversation comes out with "but Bush....." So is it the majority's opinion that if Bush did something wrong, it's okay for Obama to do so also? Relavists may rejoice in that thinking, but realists know it inhibits corrective action to today's ills. Then again, in the immortal words of Paul Simon, "all lies and jest, still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

unemployment would never get to 8% if we passed 870 billion in spending.

he wanted gasoline to get to $7-8/gal

heaped destain on " those people that cling to their guns and religion"

made 3 illegal appointments to the NLB

refuses to approve the Nebraska pipeline

denies children access to the White House while living large with Tiger Woods.

Well, you see, it's sort of difficult to take anything you say seriously when you preface your poorly written list with "white trash OBAMA".

He is white/black trash with no redeeming qualities as President. He has neither the credentials, courage, or conscience to be President. As CIC has been AWOL and should be tried for desertion. I'll allow he has done one thing that I thought was impossible; he has made Jimmy Carter look good. I 'm serious you are delusional.

unemployment would never get to 8% if we passed 870 billion in spending.

he wanted gasoline to get to $7-8/gal

heaped destain on " those people that cling to their guns and religion"

made 3 illegal appointments to the NLB

refuses to approve the Nebraska pipeline

denies children access to the White House while living large with Tiger Woods.

Well, you see, it's sort of difficult to take anything you say seriously when you preface your poorly written list with "white trash OBAMA".

He is white/black trash with no redeeming qualities as President. He has neither the credentials, courage, or conscience to be President. As CIC has been AWOL and should be tried for desertion. I'll allow he has done one thing that I thought was impossible; he has made Jimmy Carter look good. I 'm serious you are delusional.

Given your definition of Obama, would it be fair to label President George W. Bush as "white trash"? Would you take issue with someone doing that? I certainly think President Bush had a rather unimpressive 8-years in office, but I would never call him "white trash" simply because I disagreed with his decisions and ideology.

Whether you like it or not, Barack Obama was reelected as our President -- our LEADER. You don't have to agree with him at every turn, but if you accepted what is and worked to make the situation better, you'd get a helluva lot more done than sitting around calling him "white/black trash".

As I said, I wasn't a fan of Bush, but I never once questioned his intentions. I often thought his decisions weren't in the best interest of the country, but I never once questioned his motive(s). I believed deep down that President Bush was doing what HE thought was best. It didn't always match what I thought was best, but that's life. He was elected fairly (at least the second time around) and he therefore had the right to make the decisions he saw fit. Did I want him to be our president? Nope. But he was, and I had to accept that and work as best as I could to make our country a better place given the circumstances.

To be entirely honest, I'm not exactly a huge Obama fan myself. I believe(d) him to be the better alternative to Romney, but that doesn't mean I like his policies. In fact, I'd prefer someone more liberal (Ralph Nader is my dream candidate, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of happening).

But back to the point -- get over it and move on. No one is saying you have to love Obama, but a little bit of positive thinking, a little bit of positive action, and the burial of this "Obama hates the country and is attempting to ruin it" mindset, could do a lot of good.

If you truly believe Obama is attempting to send the country to hell and back again, then that's on you, but you couldn't be further from the truth.

"A leader leads with rational thought and decision making not tied to public opinion." I absolutely agree, but

"which is what Obama has done." I absolutely disagree with that. If that was the case, why does he and his administration spend nearly all of their time engage in class warfare and blamming the last administration for our country's ills.

"so, please don't be an idiot and claim he's not a leader." So anyone who doesn't think he's an effective leader is an "idiot" or "dumb?" I'm surprised you left out "racist." Obama won about 51-53% of the vote - so am I to assume you believe the remaining 49-47% who voted differently are idiots?

Look, if you want to believe that you're certainly entitled to your opinion - and I won't call you an "idiot" for it. I just wish you and folks that think as you do would recripricate the courteousy - because if that were to happen, perhaps, just perhaps things could be worked out.

unemployment would never get to 8% if we passed 870 billion in spending.

he wanted gasoline to get to $7-8/gal

heaped destain on " those people that cling to their guns and religion"

made 3 illegal appointments to the NLB

refuses to approve the Nebraska pipeline

denies children access to the White House while living large with Tiger Woods.

Well, you see, it's sort of difficult to take anything you say seriously when you preface your poorly written list with "white trash OBAMA".

He is white/black trash with no redeeming qualities as President. He has neither the credentials, courage, or conscience to be President. As CIC has been AWOL and should be tried for desertion. I'll allow he has done one thing that I thought was impossible; he has made Jimmy Carter look good. I 'm serious you are delusional.

Given your definition of Obama, would it be fair to label President George W. Bush as "white trash"? Would you take issue with someone doing that? I certainly think President Bush had a rather unimpressive 8-years in office, but I would never call him "white trash" simply because I disagreed with his decisions and ideology.

Whether you like it or not, Barack Obama was reelected as our President -- our LEADER. You don't have to agree with him at every turn, but if you accepted what is and worked to make the situation better, you'd get a helluva lot more done than sitting around calling him "white/black trash".

As I said, I wasn't a fan of Bush, but I never once questioned his intentions. I often thought his decisions weren't in the best interest of the country, but I never once questioned his motive(s). I believed deep down that President Bush was doing what HE thought was best. It didn't always match what I thought was best, but that's life. He was elected fairly (at least the second time around) and he therefore had the right to make the decisions he saw fit. Did I want him to be our president? Nope. But he was, and I had to accept that and work as best as I could to make our country a better place given the circumstances.

To be entirely honest, I'm not exactly a huge Obama fan myself. I believe(d) him to be the better alternative to Romney, but that doesn't mean I like his policies. In fact, I'd prefer someone more liberal (Ralph Nader is my dream candidate, but that has a snowball's chance in hell of happening).

But back to the point -- get over it and move on. No one is saying you have to love Obama, but a little bit of positive thinking, a little bit of positive action, and the burial of this "Obama hates the country and is attempting to ruin it" mindset, could do a lot of good.

If you truly believe Obama is attempting to send the country to hell and back again, then that's on you, but you couldn't be further from the truth.

"A leader leads with rational thought and decision making not tied to public opinion." I absolutely agree, but

"which is what Obama has done." I absolutely disagree with that. If that was the case, why does he and his administration spend nearly all of their time engage in class warfare and blamming the last administration for our country's ills.

"so, please don't be an idiot and claim he's not a leader." So anyone who doesn't think he's an effective leader is an "idiot" or "dumb?" I'm surprised you left out "racist." Obama won about 51-53% of the vote - so am I to assume you believe the remaining 49-47% who voted differently are idiots?

Look, if you want to believe that you're certainly entitled to your opinion - and I won't call you an "idiot" for it. I just wish you and folks that think as you do would recripricate the courteousy - because if that were to happen, perhaps, just perhaps things could be worked out.

Did you not just hound me in an earlier post for calling out TSWFAN for using the term "white trash". You then went on to talk about the message, not the delivery, and how politcal-correctness is ruining the country -- the truth is what should prevail.

Whether or not Obama is a good leader is obviously subjective, but I do find it rather odd that you would hammer Rusty for a lack of courteousy after your aforementioned statement on political correctness and delivery.

I sincerely doubt the 47%-49% are idiots, but they're certainly a bunch of moochers who live off government welfare.